They should be but they aren't when everything is throw into the equation.

I contend that the team's success in finding starters in the late rounds and UFA far outweighs any arguable success they've had in the 1st and 2nd rounds. The only real success (meaning, performance = cost) they've had is Jordon and Porter. As I pointer out in an earlier post, the other 1st and 2nd rounders did not create value compared to their cost (Ingram is on the new rookie scale so the salary is less important than the 2 picks given up).

Finding a Colston, Strief, Nicks, Graham, White, and Stills is a greater feat than picking a Jordan or Porter...because they were expected to play right away and were paid as such.

There is a reason Vegas pays 35 to 1 putting money on #10 and 1 to 1 on money place on red in roulette...the odds of picking the winner are considerably harder.

When you throw in their success in getting quality players in UFAs, it clearly shows our this staff does much better finding talent at the shallow end of the pool.

quote:
The New Orleans Saints have used six undrafted rookies in their lineup this season after defensive end Glenn Foster and tailback Khiry Robinson made their debuts last Sunday. (The others are guard Tim Lelito, tight end Josh Hill, linebacker Kevin Reddick and cornerback Rod Sweeting.) According to ESPN Stats & Information, that’s tied, with Cleveland, for the most in the NFL.

quote:
But that’s nothing new around New Orleans during the Sean Payton era.

quote:
According to ESPN Stats & Information, the Saints have used a total of 64 undrafted players since 2006, the third most in the NFL. The league average is 47 during that span. And dating back to 2008, the Saints have had undrafted players take 22.3 percent of all offensive or defensive snaps, the fifth most in the NFL.

ESPN

This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 1:13 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by bonethug0108

Avondale

Member since Mar 2013

12690 posts

Posted on 4/13/14 at 1:08 pm to adono

You are vastly underrating Harper, and Jenkins, while not always good, was still a key piece for a few of those years.

And Ingram cannot be compared to 2 picks when we aren't talking about the VALUE of where these guys are taken. You keep putting value in when I'm talking strictly has a guy played a role or not.

So saying Colston, Strief, Graham, etc. have great value is also equally non important in this.

It was never the value I was arguing. It was the fact that guys we have taken early always have a role(hell even Brown though he sucked arse), where as we are below 50% in rounds 3-7 as far as finding guys to contribute. While that is good, it isn't the near automatic most people say it is and it is NOT better than the 1-2 round success despite the lack of picks. That was my original point.

Again, my argument has nothing to do with the value of the picks at all.

And I separated the UDFAs for a reason because we have been very successful there, but we've also had so many complete busts there too(especially on guys people here were creaming their pants over). All the stuff I was talking about was strictly in the draft itself.

This post was edited on 4/13/14 at 1:09 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Saints Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board